Rose Valley Chit Fund Scam: Calcutta High Court Grants Interim Bail To Chairman Gautam Kundu To Meet Minor Child And Ailing Mother

The Calcutta High Court on Friday granted interim bail to Gautam Kundu, the former Chairman of the Rose Valley group of companies who had been arrested in connection with the alleged multi-crore chit fund scam that is currently being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation. An application under Section 439 of CrPC had been moved by Kundu seeking interim bail for 7 days in order to look after his minor child and ailing mother.

Justice Shivakant Prasad on Friday noted that the petitioner had moved such an application for interim bail for the second time. However, his earlier prayer for interim bail had been rejected by the Court on June 26, 2020 due to his non-production owing to the ongoing pandemic.

Furthermore, the Court noted that on an earlier instance back in January 2021 when the petitioner had been granted bail for a period of four days to see his ailing mother and minor child, he had complied with all the conditions imposed by the Court.

"The petitioner duly complied with the conditions and surrendered before the court and he is now in custody for more than six years and four months", the Court opined.

The Court also perused the various medical reports of the petitioner's ailing mother wherein it had been mentioned that she had been suffering from high grade endometrial carcinoma and is currently extremely ill. The counsel appearing on behalf of the ED also submitted before the Court a detailed report enumerating the progress made in the prosecution case currently pending before a Special CBI Court

Opining on the importance of a speedy trial in order to safeguard the fundamental rights of an accused, the Court observed,

"Golden triangle in the Indian Constitution is of significant importance to safeguard citizens basic human right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and a under trial prisoner has right of speedy trial and for that any accused who is left in the limbo of jail incarcerated for a longer period has every right to file bail applications for his release but the Court should be alive to the situation that trial be expeditiously concluded adhering to Section 309 of Cr.P.C. in case of a person in judicial custody and should not be left in limbo without trial."

The Court further went on to recommend that in case the accused is unable to be produced during trial, he can be represented by his concerned advocate and accordingly trial proceedings must be allowed to continue in order to tide over the delay caused by the pandemic since March 2020.

"The Trail Court should even conduct the trial through video conference taking note of the deposition of the witnesses and the accused persons in the judicial custody can also be produced through video link by the Superintendent of the Correctional Home without any legal impediment", the Court remarked.

Furthermore, it was observed that the right of a prisoner to a speedy trial falls within the purview of Article 21 of the Constitution and that it is incumbent on the part of the defence lawyer to represent the accused under Section 317 of CrPC in his hour of need.

"Similarly, if the prosecution has got certain impediment in not producing the witnesses before the Court, it can provide the infrastructure to the Court to conduct the trial through video link and witnesses can also be examined through video conference, if the witnesses are unable to physically attend the Court since it is imperative on the part of the court to conduct the trial adhering to the provision of 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure", the Court further opined.

Accordingly, the petitioner was released on interim bail for a period of 7 days from August 9 to August 15, 2021 on a bond of Rs.50,000/ along with the production of two sureties amounting to Rs.10,000/- each. He was further instructed to stay at the residence of his mother during the specified period.

"The Enforcement Directorate shall be at liberty to take assistance of two Armed Police Personnel from the concerned local police station to remain as Houseguard at the residence of the mother of the petitioner and the concerned police station shall abide by this condition", the Court further directed.

Click Here To Read/Download Order